[Propensity score matching analysis of the short-term efficacy of Kamikawa versus double- tract reconstruction in laparoscopic proximal gastric cancer surgery].

Q3 Medicine
H C Yang, J X He, Y Yang, Z Han, B Zhang, S Zhou, T Wu, Q Qiao, X L He, N Wang
{"title":"[Propensity score matching analysis of the short-term efficacy of Kamikawa versus double- tract reconstruction in laparoscopic proximal gastric cancer surgery].","authors":"H C Yang, J X He, Y Yang, Z Han, B Zhang, S Zhou, T Wu, Q Qiao, X L He, N Wang","doi":"10.3760/cma.j.cn441530-20230809-00040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> To compare the short-term efficacy of Kamikawa anastomosis and double-tract reconstruction (DTR) after proximal gastrectomy. <b>Methods:</b> This was a propensity score matched, retrospective, cohort study. Inclusion criteria comprised age 20-70 years, diagnosis of gastric cancer by pathological examination of preoperative endoscopic biopsies, tumor diameter ≤4 cm, and location in the upper 1/3 of the stomach (including the gastroesophageal junction), and TNM stage IA, IB, or IIA. The study cohort comprised 73 patients who had undergone laparoscopic proximal gastric cancer radical surgery in the Department of Gastroenterology, Tangdu Hospital, Air Force Medical University between June 2020 and February 2023, 19 of whom were in the Kamikawa group and 54 in the DTR group. After using R language to match the baseline characteristics of patients in a ratio of 1:2, there were 17 patients in the Kamikawa group and 34 in the DTR group. Surgery-related conditions, postoperative quality of life, and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. <b>Results:</b> After propensity score matching, there were no statistically significant differences in baseline data between the two groups (<i>P</i>>0.05). Compared with the DTR group, the Kamikawa group had longer operative times (321.5±15.7 minutes vs. 296.8±26.1 minutes, <i>t</i>=32.056, <i>P</i><0.001), longer anastomosis times (93.0±6.8 minutes vs. 45.3±7.7 minutes, <i>t</i>=56.303, <i>P</i><0.001), and less bleeding (76 [54~103] mL vs.112 [82~148) mL, <i>Z</i>=71.536, <i>P</i><0.001); these differences are statistically significant. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in tumor size, time to first postoperative passage of gas, postoperative hospital stay, number of lymph nodes removed, duration of lymph node dissection, or total hospitalization cost (all <i>P</i>>0.05). The median follow-up time was 6.1 ± 1.8 months. As to postoperative quality of life, the Kamikawa group had a lower rate of upper gastrointestinal contrast reflux than did the DTR group (0 vs. 29.4% [10/34], χ<sup>2</sup>=6.220, <i>P</i>=0.013); this difference is statistically significant. However, differences between the two groups in quality of life score on follow-up of 3 months and 6 months on the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) scale were not statistically significant (all <i>P</i>>0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications was 2/17 in the Kamikawa group, which is significantly lower than the 41.2% (14/34) in the DTR group (χ<sup>2</sup>=4.554, <i>P</i>=0.033). <b>Conclusion:</b> Kamikawa anastomosis and DTR are equally safe and effective procedures for reconstructing the digestive tract after proximal gastric surgery. Although Kamikawa anastomosis takes slightly longer and places higher demands on the surgical team, it is more effective at preventing postoperative reflux.</p>","PeriodicalId":23959,"journal":{"name":"中华胃肠外科杂志","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中华胃肠外科杂志","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn441530-20230809-00040","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the short-term efficacy of Kamikawa anastomosis and double-tract reconstruction (DTR) after proximal gastrectomy. Methods: This was a propensity score matched, retrospective, cohort study. Inclusion criteria comprised age 20-70 years, diagnosis of gastric cancer by pathological examination of preoperative endoscopic biopsies, tumor diameter ≤4 cm, and location in the upper 1/3 of the stomach (including the gastroesophageal junction), and TNM stage IA, IB, or IIA. The study cohort comprised 73 patients who had undergone laparoscopic proximal gastric cancer radical surgery in the Department of Gastroenterology, Tangdu Hospital, Air Force Medical University between June 2020 and February 2023, 19 of whom were in the Kamikawa group and 54 in the DTR group. After using R language to match the baseline characteristics of patients in a ratio of 1:2, there were 17 patients in the Kamikawa group and 34 in the DTR group. Surgery-related conditions, postoperative quality of life, and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. Results: After propensity score matching, there were no statistically significant differences in baseline data between the two groups (P>0.05). Compared with the DTR group, the Kamikawa group had longer operative times (321.5±15.7 minutes vs. 296.8±26.1 minutes, t=32.056, P<0.001), longer anastomosis times (93.0±6.8 minutes vs. 45.3±7.7 minutes, t=56.303, P<0.001), and less bleeding (76 [54~103] mL vs.112 [82~148) mL, Z=71.536, P<0.001); these differences are statistically significant. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in tumor size, time to first postoperative passage of gas, postoperative hospital stay, number of lymph nodes removed, duration of lymph node dissection, or total hospitalization cost (all P>0.05). The median follow-up time was 6.1 ± 1.8 months. As to postoperative quality of life, the Kamikawa group had a lower rate of upper gastrointestinal contrast reflux than did the DTR group (0 vs. 29.4% [10/34], χ2=6.220, P=0.013); this difference is statistically significant. However, differences between the two groups in quality of life score on follow-up of 3 months and 6 months on the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) scale were not statistically significant (all P>0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications was 2/17 in the Kamikawa group, which is significantly lower than the 41.2% (14/34) in the DTR group (χ2=4.554, P=0.033). Conclusion: Kamikawa anastomosis and DTR are equally safe and effective procedures for reconstructing the digestive tract after proximal gastric surgery. Although Kamikawa anastomosis takes slightly longer and places higher demands on the surgical team, it is more effective at preventing postoperative reflux.

[腹腔镜近端胃癌手术中上川重建与双道重建的短期疗效倾向得分匹配分析]。
目的比较近端胃切除术后上川吻合术和双牵引重建术(DTR)的短期疗效。方法: 这是一项倾向得分匹配、回顾性、队列研究:这是一项倾向评分匹配的回顾性队列研究。纳入标准包括:年龄 20-70 岁,通过术前内镜活检的病理检查确诊为胃癌,肿瘤直径小于 4 厘米,位置位于胃的上 1/3(包括胃食管交界处),TNM 分期 IA、IB 或 IIA。研究队列由2020年6月至2023年2月期间在空军军医大学唐都医院消化内科接受腹腔镜近端胃癌根治术的73名患者组成,其中上川组19人,DTR组54人。使用 R 语言按 1:2 的比例匹配患者的基线特征后,上川组有 17 名患者,DTR 组有 34 名患者。比较了两组患者的手术相关情况、术后生活质量和术后并发症。结果:经过倾向评分匹配后,两组患者的基线数据差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。与 DTR 组相比,神川组的手术时间更长(321.5±15.7 分钟 vs. 296.8±26.1 分钟,t=32.056,Pt=56.303,PZ=71.536,PP>0.05)。中位随访时间为 6.1±1.8 个月。在术后生活质量方面,上川组的上消化道造影剂反流率低于 DTR 组(0 vs. 29.4% [10/34],χ2=6.220,P=0.013);这一差异具有统计学意义。不过,两组患者在随访 3 个月和 6 个月时的胃食管反流病(GERD)量表中的生活质量评分差异无统计学意义(均为 P>0.05)。上川组的术后并发症发生率为 2/17,明显低于 DTR 组的 41.2%(14/34)(χ2=4.554,P=0.033)。结论上川吻合术和 DTR 是近端胃手术后重建消化道同样安全有效的手术。虽然上川吻合术所需时间稍长,对手术团队的要求更高,但它能更有效地防止术后反流。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
中华胃肠外科杂志
中华胃肠外科杂志 Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6776
期刊介绍:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信